Posted on 01/11/2016 8:26:21 PM PST by gg188
Senator Ted Cruz has positioned himself as a strong opponent of same-sex marriage, urging pastors nationwide to preach in support of marriage as an institution between a man and a woman, which he said was “ordained by God.â€
But on Monday night, at a reception for him at the Manhattan apartment of two prominent gay hoteliers, the Texas senator and Republican presidential hopeful struck quite a different tone.
During the gathering, according to two people present, Mr. Cruz said he would not love his daughters any differently if one of them was gay. He did not mention his opposition to same-sex marriage, saying only that marriage is an issue that should be left to the states.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
You know. It’s all these sissies throw hissy fits on FR that are making me want to take a break for a while. Utterly destroying each other while the left laughs their butts off at the conservatives doing their work for them.
All they have to do is research a FR thread and they have anything and everything they needs. Real smart.
Of what is that a picture? (Wow, that’s ugly, whatever it is.)
Trump trollinator, indeed. No doubt Trump employs many of the “homosexual” set in his many properties-— they make good concierges and maitre’Ds. So what do the trump trollers say about THAT?
Who are they trying to dissuade with this bilge water? The evangelicals know differently— and they know what a farce Trump is.
First... Ted has had gay donors in the past: Peter Theil is a gay libertarian billionaire who gave a lot of money to Ted’s senate campaign.
With that out of the way, what’s the big damn deal? Ted’s stance on the issue of gay marriage is let the states decide, and it’s a good stance. If these guys want to give Ted money, let them give him money, he’s not going to change his stance on this subject.
It’s the flaming homosexual Trump hired to judge the Miss USA pageant back in 2009. The same homo who eliminated Miss California Carrie Prejean because he didn’t like her response to his question about queer “marriage”.
Sure. Riight. The super PACs maybe, but not Cruz campaign. There is, after all, another demographic besides evangelicals.
If Willie Brown ever said that then he stole it from
his buddy, Jesse Unruh.
Maybe he was quoting Jesse Unruh. Jesse could take anybody’s money and then screw them. But if you didn’t grease his palm, you would really be screwed.
That... was... human??
John S Mosby- How do the evangelicals know the truth- about anything? Do you claim truth as your Name?
That's debatable. :-P
Huh?
It’s getting ugly because Cruz is close to Trump in Iowa and so the attacks begin breathlessly, in the media and from both campaigns. The closer to that election, the crazier (meaner and inane) it will get. Conservatives should be trying pick people away from Rubio.
To me, the truth is, no matter if we get Trump or Cruz, they are going to stink to a certain degree. They are not going to do everything they say they are going to do and they are going to do bad things they are hiding or that come up. I just hope it’s better than the usual GOPe or DNC fare.
“CRUZ MUST BE GAY!
Time to support Hillary!
Anonymously,
Sarcastically,
golux”
Don’t get your panties in a twist. Cruz has been flip flopping on major issues. Now let’s say you love faggots but a majority of us here don’t, and them bullying a lot of the majority of Americans who dont accept their poofter lifestyle especially with the homo marriage crap.
I remember Herbert Caen attributing that to Unruh back in
the 60s or 70s. Limbaugh linked the quip to Unruh just
the other day. He might have even been talking about Cruz
at the time but someone else around here knows for sure.
Unruh was a shit headed gasbag like Willie.
His strip clubs, casinos, ex-wives, vulgar consumption of wealth, his vain displays of his name on all he owns, all speak to Christian humility, ethics, and a desire to set an example for young Americans. History books will marvel at the self-restraint and self-control of this pious man.
So, you are the pious man? The accuser? The savior?
Or, just a blowhard?
In this sound bite age, it’s difficult to get any good context. Though I would have been more comfortable to see them being Cruz’s guests, still a Zacchaeus variety of meeting would not be out of the question.
There seems to be a demonic variation of the Calvinist/Calminian “Once saved always saved” going around which is “Once gay always gay.” That latter is a blasted lie, although Christians would be wrong if they said it was not often a serious challenge to deal with the demons underlying that scene.
And a good Christian move may or may not mean Cruz is best suited to be the president, to add another level of complexity to the question. Perhaps the Lord has destined him to be of great import to the good right where he is, as a Senator.
No, he’s just another politician talking out of both sides of his mouth. Say one thing to get elected; then do whatever when in office.
Old saying: “Sleep with dogs; wake up with fleas”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.